How can this argument even be refuted using adult counter-arguments?
inb4
>cooties from other penises.
You shake hands with strangers don't you?
>STDs
What is condom?
>DUDE she absorbs DNA from semen
no, she doesn't. you're scientific illiterate.
>DUCK LOCK AND KEY
you're fat, virgin disgrace and your analogy doesn't track the facts here
>B-b-but she will be less happy as a wife
Stats that show happiness in marriage inversely related to number of previous sexual partners do not take into account the fact that most people who marry virgins are raised in a family oriented culture to begin with.
Romantic marriage was a 20th century american invention to sell you shit. it lived for 4 decades before collapsing. Get real. Marriage has always been a partnership, division or resources.
>Loose vagine
Nope
>B-b-but it's hard to be a stud and it's easy to be slut
>M-u-h natural fallacy
Even if this was true. So the fuck what?
>>70854274
Do you want a bowl of cheerios that has had 100 penises in it?
>>70854274
>fact that most people who marry virgins are raised in a family oriented culture to begin with.
This alone is a good enough reason you cuck. Why would I want a woman who isn't family oriented?
I mostly agree with you, OP, but at the same time you should consider that a girl who sleeps with a lot of people (or even a guy) can be indicative of a lifestyle and personality that doesn't jive with what someone wants. I'm not saying they're bad people, but I am saying they're into a different way of life than you might be.
3/10
make a better argument next time
made me reply
Shut up slut
>>70854274
>Implying that a vagina that's had 500 cocks in it will be as tight as one that's had 5
Who do you work for and how much are they paying you to shill this John Green picture every fucking day
>>70854274
>Stats that show happiness in marriage inversely related to number of previous sexual partners do not take into account the fact that most people who marry virgins are raised in a family oriented culture to begin with.
[citation needed]
>>70854677
If we want to be technical about it, as long as the woman in question lets her cunt actually heal after intercourse it wont get destroyed and you could potentially have a reasonably tight cunt after 500 partners. But that would require things unknown to women like forethought, common sense and restraint.
>>70854274
Go ahead, but can we also agree on abolishing the (welfare) state so I don't have to pay for the consequences of your stupid decisions?
>>70854274
I would like a stable relationship where either partner never feels like they are missing out, for one.
sage this pos thread
tired of you fucking windbag cucks.
>>70854274
Same shitposter, same thread different day.
So listen up, because this is the last time I'm going to explain it.
This is not ideological it is evolutionary.
Men and women have had a symbiotic relationship for hundreds of thousands of years.
Women value men for resources and security while men value women for their ability to birth and raise their biological offspring.
This is a mutually beneficial exchange which has helped make mankind the apex species on the planet.
Men are willing to sacrifice themselves and their resources for their genetic offspring.
It is undeniable who a person's mother is because they came out of her vagina. But up untill fairly recently (paternity tests) it was impossible to determine who the father was with any certainty unless the woman was locked up and prevented from engaging with any other men. (Which muslims still do to this very day)
So the man provides his resources and security based on trust that the woman he was providing it to is faithful which ensures that he provides for his own offspring and not for another man's.
Promiscuous women by their actions break this trust, so very few men will want to provide security and resources for them. They cannot be trusted to uphold their end of the symbiotic bargain.
Nobody says women can't offer their poon to whoever they want anytime they want, I would gladly accept it too.
However if a man is searching to settle and raise a family the last options are these kind of women, why? A woman that likes that much to taste the variety is prone to do continue doing it even after marriage, they can't settle with one man.
No man is going to cuck himself at his own will. Except if you are Allison Rapp's husband.
>>70854274
>>70854445
I'm going to use liberal language here: There are different paths through life. If I have walked the path of being ashamed of my masculine sexuality and have little prior experience, then I will be clumsy and insecure sexually. I will then benefit from having someone to be clumsy and insecure with together.
This is not a theoretical situation, I lost my V-card last year at 33 years of age. Among experienced woman, I found 1 - *ONE* who had the patience to accept my lack of experience and take a "teacher" role. This out of a a group of about 15 women I dated. We still didn't work out though, but my point here is that the other fourteen came in with a lot of taboos and painful past experiences that meant I wasn't free to explore sexuality from *MY* starting point at the time - that of a virgin.
Important to specify: This was not because they went "haha, loser virgin". It was because their sexual past had changed them to a point where they were not receptive to my clumsy attempts at communicating sexually.
To put it another way: Wine conoisseur's drink a lot of wine. Their experiences with different wines change their perception of a wine until they appreciates different qualities in a wine than normal people. I don't know a lot about wine, so I can't enjoy the same wines.
I firmly believe that it would have been better for me to meet someone who had walked the same path as me and that I would have formed a stronger bond with a woman who shared my felings of life-long rejection and insecurity. Sex could have been a grand adventure that we went through together, experiencing new things together.
This is not to say that having past sexual experiences make women bad persons - less desirable for men with limited experience, yes, but you shouldn't conflate the fact that we don't want to date these women with saying they are bed people. Just less desirable as lifemates.
> Daily reminder that the plural form of anecdotal evidence is not data.
>>70854274
This thread, every fucking day.
The average number of sex partners for a woman is 4. For a guy, it's 7. If you are significantly higher than that, you are a slut, regardless of gender.
Being a slut means that sex with an individual isn't a significant act for you, and it means that you're much more likely to have contracted STDs at some point.
Being a slut is degenerate.
>>70854274
We don't shake penis with others, well most don't.
There's a difference between a hand and a penis, if you can't tell the difference. Then that covers your loose vagine point.
What's a condom, something that after sex and sleeping, often has to be fished out.
I have one cock, with careful use it will last a lifetime. I choose where I stick it and that is not in you.
>>70854274
Let me put it to you this way.
A girl who has 3 babies by 3 different fathers.
Is known for sleeping around and spends most of her time on her back.
The fact that none of these relationships are capable of existing with any form of permanence suggests that she has terrible judgement and is prone to making bad decisions without ever actually learning from her mistakes.
There's a reason people are judging.
so you had one valid argument every time you make the thread?
a constantly evolving bait
I like it
![1457897486042[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1Orj7D3.jpg "1457897486042[2].jpg")
>all this fedora shit
A woman who didn't fuck fifty guys before me was good enough for my grandfather, therefore I want the same thing.
If more men adopted this philosophy, women would have to adapt lest they fail to breed.
I like this comment an anon said in response to this almost daily thread
I don't eat Cheerios. I chose not to
>>70854274
>zodiac killer
>>70854410
False equivalence bro. Nobody puts their penis in a bowl of cheerios.
John Green is a child molester
>>70854518
h...has pepe always been black
>>70854274
>adult counter-arguments
>you're fat, virgin disgrace and your analogy doesn't track the facts here
>>70857025
Underrated perspective.
>>70857025
Well put Sven.
>>70854274
nice bait, cuck
>>70857025
Could I hire you to liberal language redpilled arguments for me so I can explain my perspective without them resorting to buzzwords and "muh feelings"?
>>70854274
>>DUCK LOCK AND KEY
>you're fat, virgin disgrace and your analogy doesn't track the facts here
Lol OP your a hypocrite.
>There's nothing of importance to the number of people you have sex with
>HAHA VIRGIN XDDDDD
>>70854274
Okay, so dude wants to compare sleeping around to eating lots of breakfast cereals. Here's how I refute his logic...
Would you rather eat a bowl of cheerios that you know is fine, or would you rather eat a bowl of cheerios that had 48 penises in it?
Well here's his obviously feminist wife with her thousand cock stare - he doesn't really believe it - there's just very literal lateral pressure when he fucks her and has to rationalise it.
>>70854274
Do you post this every day?
Most men have to try.
Women don't unless they're fat or black.
Call it a fallacy if you want, but it does'nt change the fact its true.
>>70858997
I could try, but my impression is that in the US, liberals and conservatives are so far removed from each other these days that moderate arguments just lose out automatically because every one wants their political arguments to feel like a revival meeting.
I have the same problem with norwegian liberals - Unless I word myself in a very very specific way with a lot of reassurances, then I might as well speak in tongues.
>>70854274
in other new
>i believe this, however, the statistics dont matter, so we dont count this, so now without the actual reason why, tell me the reason why
plus if you are discounting STDs/HIV as a serious thing and the multitude of STDs you can get that bypass a condom you are definitely retarded
John Green is a pedo.
>>70854274
>no, she doesn't. you're scientific illiterate.
This is not proper grammar. if you are going to criticize people for being illiterate you should at least use proper grammar
>>70854274
Well I guess it can't be refuted if you refuse to acknowledge any of the counter-arguments. Well played, leftie. You're still wrong though.
>>70860145
Well you articulated it well, and added a copypasta that can be screenshotted and posted when this thread is repeated tomorrow
>>70854274
>comparing humans to consumer products
Pretty sure that makes you a sociopath or something.
>>70854274
>>Loose vagine
>Nope
Nice "adult arguement" there, champ
I just wanna be hugged 2bh
>>70854274
>Stats that show happiness in marriage inversely related to number of previous sexual partners do not take into account the fact that most people who marry virgins are raised in a family oriented culture to begin with.
So? That's doesn't discount the fact that women who are family oriented are happier than sloots
>>70858085
...and this is wrong, why?
>>70854677
don't get me wrong on this, i hate sluts and fucking around is just wrong, but if all of these 5 did her 100 times, how would that be any different, really?
on topic: her chances of cheating/leaving are higher as she can obviously never be satisfied with what she has, also, maybe I just don't want to have a girlfriend/wife who lets anyone fuck her? Maybe I am someone who thinks that sex is something special not to be shared with everyone.
>>70857025
WOW WHAT A GIANT FAG.
There are plenty of well experienced women who positively get off on the idea of being a teacher to a virgin.
even hookers.
Pic related is a veteran porn star who loves to sexually educate people. literally. She is gentle and easy going.
You're probably just pathetic and want a similarly pathetic woman to have your vanilla yogurt and tea(without sugar please) kind of sex.
>>70854274
It's empirically proven that women are less happy and less committed the more partners they have.
>>70854274
Men fuck women, not the other way around.
A more accurate analogy would be a bowl of cheerios that has been sampled by 48 people before you. Go ahead, take a bite.
>Why don't you want to be with someone who has a history of poor decision making skills, lacks trust in her choices, and gets angry when others point this out?
I think there's a psychological term for people like this.
>>70854274
I am a virgin and I do not want to have sex with anyone who is not a virgin.
>>70854274
>Marriage has always been a partnership, division or resources.
Marriage has always been a partnership of resources? Fine, you want to approach this emotionlessly? Let's do it.
The only purpose of marriage is to join resources to raise children. It is a significant investment of time and capital for the purpose of reproduction.
Marrying a nonvirgin significantly increases the risk to the male investor, because the more sexual partners a woman has the higher chance the marriage will terminate [costing significant capital and destroying any hope of returns on time invested] or that she will cheat on you and cuck you [leading to forfeiture of all investment because you're not getting the product you invested to get, which is namely biological children].
>inb4 muh adoption muh so what if they're not biologically yours!
A man has no stake in raising the children of another man as his own. If he wants to have sexual access, he doesn't need to be married. If he wants children to teach and pass down his beliefs to, he only needs to join mentoring organizations. Marriage is a poor investment unless you're doing it specifically for the purpose of having biological children of your own. If you're not having those children, you can access everything else a marriage provides for less in different ways.
Now stop posting these threads every day.
>>70863696
>but my point here is that the other fourteen came in with a lot of taboos and painful past experiences that meant I wasn't free to explore sexuality from *MY* starting point at the time - that of a virgin.
>Sex could have been a grand adventure that we went through together, experiencing new things together.
Guy says he wants to have a sexual adventure and try new things you claim he wants
>vanilla yogurt and tea(without sugar please) kind of sex.
did you make it past the first paragraph?
>54 replies
why pay the autist any attention
A key that opens many locks is a Master Key.
A lock that opens to many keys is a shitty lock.
Do you like nut sack flavored Cheerios?
>>70854274
Nigger you post this everyday and you continue to gloss over the best argument against this -
People aren't commercial products, and some people choose to see sex as more than recreation, but actual bonding.
You declaring something is "So 20th century" doesn't mean everybody thinks it is, and as such some people have sexual standards. I personally dont have many, but you'd be retarded to think that your lack of sexual standards should be what everyone adopts. A person with those standards has as much right to live by them than a person that doesn't has a right to sleep around. And the best part is, it doesn't have to make sense to you, it's personal freedom you spammy twat.
>>70854274
>Cheerios having issue with you eating other cereal.
This is a bad analogy. Eating is something you have to do. You don't have to eat cereal. You could go your whole life not eating any cereal, but you have eaten. It is biologically essential to your survival to eat. There is no situation where you save your first meal.
The proper comparison is if you buy a box of Cheerios at the store, the box is sealed, you take it home and open it, but the bag inside is ripped open, torn, 2/3rd empty and has some bits of Froot Loops and Frosted Flakes inside it.
I wish women would make up their mind already. They want the right to be whores but I'm not allowed to try to find out if they're whores.
>>70854274
thought this would be cringe then i got to the whole grain crunch
>>70854274
can you stop posting this garbage every fucking day already ?
>>70864294
>Marrying a nonvirgin significantly increases the risk to the male investor, because the more sexual partners a woman has the higher chance the marriage will terminate
Is this anecdotal or do you have evidence? Genuinely curious
>>70854274
The sexual revolution is fine and if women want to fuck indiscriminately that should be their prerogative. I say if "they" want to it should be "their" prerogative because as any keen observer of society notices women always move and act together like a giant amoeba, even when there are only two of them dealing with each other at the same time.
Anyways, what people fail to realize is that they can't have their cake and eat it too. Most people completely lose touch of everyone they ever become friends with because capitalism keeps populations in America mobile and constantly moving to find better work. Monogamy is not a perfect institution, but if you maintain a monogamous relationship for a very long time it will probably be the only stable social relationship you have in your entire life.
Women have every right to fuck as many guys as they want. However, the shift away from monogamous relationships makes any "relationship" people have these days just a temporary agreement to hang out and have sex with one another slightly more regularly than we hang out and have sex with other people. The fact that she has fucked so many people probably means that she has not maintained very many long term relationships. Emotional investment into the relationship beyond what is minimally required to have sex becomes irrational.
Once relationships have been reduced to that level, any semblance of a link or bond binding two people's interest together disappears. You're just temporarily one of the guys she is also fucking on the side for some time and it won't matter much if you guys don't stay together or even stay in contact. John Greene is a dopey white kid who grew up on disney cartoons and has lead an extremely privileged life that has not lead him to deeply think about issues on this level. His knee jerk feminism forces him to undermine the conditions of the possibility of romantic love at the same time as he thinks he is defending it.
>>70866278
Furthermore, increasing sexual promiscuity raises women's standards for how much sexual pleasure they should be receiving in general to a level that is completely impossible for one partner to maintain by themselves unless they are highly skilled physically fit lovers who are willing to diligently spend hours making sure their women have 10 orgasms before they even begin engaging in sexual intercourse.
Even then I have cucked guys who were in relationships with girls that had sex lives that good before.
tl;dr These hoes ain't loyal.
>>70857657
>that orange screen
Well, at least you protect your eyes.
>>70857025
shit, this was actually sound.
>>70858062
Sweden does
>>70854274
false premise. women aren't held to a different standard. the standard corresponds to the difficulty perceived in obtaining sexual partners. Also fallacy of faulty comparison. sounds like Mr. Green is an active cuck and needs to reconcile that in his mind
Limp dick Green needs to keep his shitty opinion and shittier analogy to himself, if I don't want a woman who sleeps around I'm not going to settle for one. Women are free to be sluts, but they don't get to act like it's praiseworthy, nor do they get to complain about my criteria for a partner.
>>70854410
More like a bowl of cheerios that 100 guys came inside before you eat it. Which John Green would probably love, because he's king of the nu-males.
>>70859559
is that legit his wife?
>dude looks like a lady
>you're fat, virgin disgrace
So it's ok to shame people for how little sex they have had?
Hmm.
>>70863696
>There are plenty of well experienced women who positively get off on the idea of being a teacher to a virgin.
Note that I ended my post by admitting it was an ANECDOTE, and that my personally experienced ANECDOTE not necessarilly presents the whole picture.
So there are more of those women out there? That's good to hear, but I've only found one so far.
> Pic related is ...
Her heart seems to be in the right place. I think I picked up cunnilingus from one of her videos last year(That was so much easier in practice than I thought it would be. Just play around wth rhytm until the grill starts breathing differently, then do more of what I did then). Other than that I am not overly familiar with her work.
Wait a minute. You did not take my reservations into account? You just jumped straight to the name calling?
> WOW WHAT A GIANT FAG.
> You're probably just pathetic
Oh yes you did. I can only assume you're either the whitest of knights or that you have a personal stake in feeling that I, a person you've never met, would not rule you out as a sex partner if we met IRL. So you're either a cuck(-cold or -quean) or you're capable of winning every pathetic-competition from here to /r9k/.
>>70858062
speak for yourself, asshole
>STDs
>What is condom?
You do realize that some condoms have microscopic holes which viruses can easily pass through, right?
Try making these sorts of "arguments" to insurance companies.
It's called risk factors. It's not about whether there's a solution to them or not. The fact that the problem exists increases the risk factor and the probability something bad occurring.
Therefore it's completely logical and smart to shame sluts because they have a higher risk factor for diseases and emotional instability which can lead to other problems in your life.
Stay mad, tumblart mall cop.
>>70857025
An actually decent take on the subject that doesn't just resort to "muh bible"/"muh tradition"/ "cuckcukcuck".
>>70854274
Yeah, except
>tfw have a very solid argument against this
>OP invariably makes the thread and then runs off for some reason
>>70854274
It has been proven time and time again that societies begin falling apart the more sexually liberated their people are. There are many theorized causes, most of which make a lot of sense, but regardless the outcome is the same: when a society loses its sense of value in staying monogamous, it collapses soon afterword to be replaced by another more sexually repressed and patriarchal society. The process then repeats itself.
Cool arguments bro, let me try
>something something strawman something
Ur an doody hed no sex lulz
Flawless
>>70857025
>I lost my V-card last year at 33
Your opinion on women is absolutely irrelevant then.
I lost it to a MILF when I was 13 and I've been getting it since then.
Still I agree that I would preffer a woman that has not had many sex partners for a serious relationship. For not-so-serious relationships, one night stands and friends with benefits I could not care less about how many guys and/or girls they have fucked.
>>70854274
How about this? Humans are more complex than cereal and the metaphor he uses is massively simplified. It applies to both men and women. I wouldn't fuck anyone that's slept with 48 other people, or 14 for that matter. John Green is making a stupid argument.
P.S. Is this your desk? How much do they pay?
>>70854274
> Natural law
> A fallacy
Holy fuck you guys are actually fucking retarded.
>Stats that show happiness in marriage inversely related to number of previous sexual partners do not take into account the fact that most people who marry virgins are raised in a family oriented culture to begin with.
Completely false.
> Implying condoms are 100% effective. top kek lad
Being a slut is degenerate, and it's also immoral, as it sullies the otherwise sacred nature of sex.
>>70868698
>I lost it to a MILF when I was 13
>that flag
>>70858062
And comparing humans to cereal isn't?
>>70863537
Just wear this and you won't have to worry about it.
>>70865755
There's tons of evidence, see >>70855572
>>70865755
>Is this anecdotal or do you have evidence?
Google is your friend. Jesus.
This is like, Gender Wars 101 here Britbong. That's like saying "Do you have evidence that black people commit more crimes? Or is it anecdotal?"
The statistics that show the more sexual partners before marriage a woman has is strongly correlated with marriage failure is one of the most widely known facts in the debate on promiscuity.
>>70854416
Oy vey goyim who wants children? They're totally overrated!
>>70854274
>>70857025
THIS
I mean 99% members of this board are virgin losers. It should be natural for such a community to hate "sluts" because they are completely different
>>70855572
Bb-b-but I'm OP and I just said that my stats say the opposite!
>>70857025
What the fuck is wrong with you? Are you an alien or just really ugly? I'm not saying that everyone needs to have sex at 13 or something but 33? Do you have anything to show for it? Are you a billionaire?
>>70854274
>>70869107
>I mean 99% members of this board are virgin losers
definitely a huge overstatement, especially on /pol/
Straight up virgins are likely <50%
>>70854274
>Eating cereal
Enjoy your obesity cucklord.
>Cheerios
Tastes like cardboard.
>>70854274
>believing in love at all
>not just fucking women
>basing your entire life around women
>being dependent on the approval of vaginas
>even considering marriage
>even considering giving money to women
it's like you cucks want to live your whole lives as cucks, it's not to grow up you faggots
>>70854274
How's about:
I DON'T NEED TO JUSTIFY REFUSING TO PUT MY COCK IN SOMETHING
>NOW FUCK OFF
>>70854274
>adult counterarguments
>you're fat, virgin disgrace
>>70868847
She was from northern Mexico, so she was sorta nice.
I'd fuck the shit out of that señora on your pic anyway to be quite honest with you familia.
>>70855396
[Citation needed]
>>70869107
>projecting this hard
just because you're a virgin kurwa doesn't mean everyone else here is.
>>70869374
True, but there's a bunch of undersexed (>6 mo. without sex) "men" on this board and that's equally embarrassing.
>>70867359
i find it funny that his pc says that, while i was a libcuck before i started using the internet
>>70868698
I'm a degenerate who's fucked around quite a bit, I've even race mixed and betrayed my perfect white heritage (yes, that was me making fun of /pol/, I'm not actually a white supremacist neo-nazi who cares about that too much). I still agree the complete lack of monogamy is a complete cancer to society, and there's evidence to back it up.
>>70869784
Yeah true, I'm one of those
I get triggered so hard at this 'different standards' bullshit
Obviously there are different standards, and they are grounded in millions of years of evolution. When a woman gets pregnant, she's out of commission for the better part of a year, requires more resources to survive, and for the vast majority of human history she was likely to die in childbirth. This means women must be very choosy about their partners because THEY ARE THE ONES CARRYING THE CHILD (IMPORTANT). All throughout the natural world, particularly in mammals, the sex that carries the child must choose the strongest/best mate (often through making them compete with each other), and the sex that doesn't must mate as much as possible. These are the patterns that have emerged from nature.
Now with modern contraceptive techniques and the 'sexual revolution' of the 60's we see these roles breaking down, and as they go so too will the family unit and even the racial unit, until the hierarchy of society is distilled down to just the Government and You.
>>70869904
>I'm a degenerate
>thinking anything you say matters one bit
fucking lol
>>70869599
>Love was invented by people advertising condoms.
What? Not only is the timeline off, but condom ads are slutty as shit. It's all about having sex without making kids. That's like a feminist Facebook meme.
>>70854274
Why do I need to refute it? If a woman has the right to fuck as many people as she wants, then I have the right to tell them to fuck off once they hit their mid thirties and want to "settle down".
>>70857025
>I firmly believe that it would have been better for me to meet someone who had walked the same path as me and that I would have formed a stronger bond with a woman who shared my felings of life-long rejection and insecurity. Sex could have been a grand adventure that we went through together, experiencing new things together.
this, a million times this
women who sleep around are like niggers in that they are evolutionarily backwards; it probably comes from an historical affinity for being raped
>>70869100
B
T
F
O
>>70870159
>nylons
>condoms
are you retarded? lol
>>70854274
Simple.
"Would you let your wife sleep with another woman?
Do Cheerios care whether you pledge not to eat any other cereals?"
>>70869904
Yeah I sort of agree with you. Stability goes a long way, specially in social relations and even more in romantic ones. My point was that the norway guy is a loser.
>>70854274
FTFY
>>70869309
This sort of behavior is exactly the kind that is sending our society down the drain. Encouraging men to be sluts encourages women to meet that demand and then marriage goes to shit, and with it the rearing of children. And no, I'm not a virgin, I'm a degenerate sex crazed retard, but still at least I'm making a decision to start helping society.
>>70854274
What an ugly face.
>>70854274
>want to marry a girl
>who cares about STDs? you can just use condoms for the rest of your life lol what are you a virgin?
Multiple partners removes ability to form pair bonds that result in life long partnership, look at statistics for number of partners : years together on average aggregate. if you have no interest in a life long partnership centered around reproduction and raising mentally stable children then don't bother.
But children from families with broken homes disproportionately represent themselves in crime and insanity statistics.
>>70870292
(((Freudian))) slip.
>>70854274
>How can this argument even be refuted using adult counter-arguments?
He shouldn't care about the cheerios questioning how many cereals he ate. He should be more concerned with the fact that he is eating a bowl of cereal that several people already ate. That is to say, that he is eating a bowl of vomit.
>>70854274
Best counter-argument I've seen to this
>>70854274
>virgins are fat and disgusting
>i need to protect muh hot sluts & whores
This position is disconcerting...
>>70859559
This can't be real. Is that really his wife? Holy shit.
Why does this get posted every day
>>70870156
By that logic, no ones opinion matters. Everyone is a fucking degenerate in some way or another, especially on /pol/.
>>70870651
They get paid to post it.
there's just one issue the argument goes both ways and you cant compare a person (a living sentient being with individual thoughts and emotions) with a fucking breakfast cereal
>>70870681
nope, just you
pic related is what you should do
>>70857029
You mad bro? No pussy for you?
>John "We gotta raise taxes" Green
>>70857561
No internet as good for him also so fuck of.
Why are Americans so puritan?
>>70857025
damn this is actually a really good argument that normies can understand
to hit even closer to home you could compare it to drinking with parents vs friends for the first time
>>70870651
The bait will be there as long as people keep taking it.
>>70854274
Roastie.
>>70870314
But you telling him he's a loser for not having sex is the same behavior that encourages impressionable young kids to go have sex with whomever and kill culture/society as we know it. Back when culture was booming and blossoming, being a virgin was cool.
>>70870958
>have teachers make more money just to tax them more
holy fuck
>>70870866
Promiscuity is unattractive in anyone, regardless of gender.
However there's nothing wrong with enjoying sex, casual or no. Just have a bit of self respect and don't go sucking the first available dick after a few drinks.
>>70854274
>giving away your intimacy like handshake
it tels a lot about a person, male or female
they are cuck and dump tier
Oh hey look this thread again..
>>70854274
Condoms are not 100% also STD's can be spread through kissing,or oral/genital contact.
So it is good to know what they may have
Also if someone is willing to sleep with hundreds of people their standards are either very low or they have some inability to commit to a relationship both of which are reasons for concern.
There are plenty of reasons to not want to be with someone that has had sex with too many people and it's not restricted to women either if a guy has been fucking around too much it's not good either.
Keep it in your fucking pants
>>70868298
BTFO!
>>70871065
because its our history you fucking heretic
>>70871141
Not exactly, throughout almost all of human history most people have lost their virginity shortly after puberty and being a virgin beyond that age has always been uncool, hence why bachelors and spinsters get ridiculed in pretty much every work of literature in history, it's just that in the past most teenagers lost their virginity on their wedding night instead of in the back seat of a Toyota
>heretic
Keep telling yourself that protestant faggot.
>>70863696
>Adult counter-arguments
>WOW WHAT A GIANT FAG
How does it feel to be a hypocritical moron?
>>70870958
>he literally wants to increase third world populations
What an idiot.
>wake up in the morning
>see two bowls of cereal
>one has slobber all over it, half empty, puke in milk
>other was just poured and looks pristine
>choosing the clean sanitary one makes you "fat virgin neckbeard who needs to get laid!!!!"
Cucks are getting desperate boys
>>70871852
Kek I lost my virginity in the back seat of a Dodge. But regardless, the marriage aspect was important. Also, that's not true. Men who didn't marry were usually just considered to be more religious/more focused on other things, etc. And while it's true all throughout history people have been having tons of random adolescent sex, the only societies that rose up and made something of themselves were the ones that repressed their sexuality.
OP is a faggot.
>>70868298
Came here to post this.
>>70858062
/r/ing a timestamp pic of an anon's dick in a bowl of Cheerios
From an astute plebbitor on John Green's wife:
The important thing to remember about Sarah is that she was attractive. John and Sarah went to high school together and she ignored him, treated him like shit. They reconnected when they were both 24 and went on two dates. In his own words, "<She> dumped me after two dates, because I was awkward and couldn't talk to her"
They agreed to "stayed friends" and four years later (right after John published a successful novel) they reconnected and were married in under a year. They were both 28-29.
They've been married now for almost 10 years and John is doing great, he's got tons of money from his novels and soon to be movie adaptation. He has hordes of teenage girls who want to sleep with him. Within his social group his has the highest of status.
Sarah did it perfectly, she slept around until she was 28, hit the wall, then grabbed a great beta to provide for her. Their relationship is practically a red pill case study.
There's a crash course video where John is talking to, "me from the past" and he says something along the lines of, "Yeah me from the past, you know that hot girl Sarah who's popular and doesn't talk to you. Yeah I married her!"
I laughed. That's such a beta assertion. One of my ex's started dating a guy and we met at a bar. I said something like, "nice to see you took a step down in quality" to her. The guy responded, "HAHA that's why I'm with <girls name> and you're not"
Enjoy my leftovers dude.
>>70854274
I consider it a judgement issue.
If she has had too sleep with that many people to find the one she truly "loves" then she is not a good judge of character. And why would she sleep with so many people in order for them to be with her. Obviously some other characteristic is at work that would force that many people to not like a person. and why would she give it up so easy to that many people? either she does not like herself and thus will use it as a mechanism to force people to like her or does not understand a persons true worth. either way there is another issue at hand with that woman than her amount of sexual partners
>>70854274
What sort of 4 eyed libtard is he? There is a difference between opening a new bag of cheerios, or have a bowl of cheerios that several people cummed inside, it does not matter how many different kind of cerials did I eat before, I still want cerial without cum.
Honestly though... the percentage of people, male or female, who have slept with "a LOT" of people is so tiny compared to the ammount of people who have had anywhere between one and a handful. I've had 3 sexual partners before meeting the love of my life. She has had 4. She is tight as fuck, neither of us has ever had any STD (and yes, we tested) and we are both conservative leaning socially and politically. We have a stable and good marriage and are wholly confident in our ability to keep our vows and be happy together, now 8 years into our marriage.
Then there is the fact that even in the good ol days people had multiple sexual partners all the time. Just because the priest tells you it aint right and people tend to not tell their parents about it for fear of repercussions doesn't mean it didn't happen. I mean... fuck... how naive are you really? You think teenagers in 1816 are less horny than the ones that are alive now? If anything the attempts of preventing masturbation and the lack of internet porn increased the likelihood of people becoming sexually active outside of marriage.
I'm a conservative and think that when it comes to sexual partners it should be reserved for "special" people... but claiming that any extramarital sex is by definition degenerate sounds like betamale bullshit to me. I fucked girls, girls got fucked and the experience probably did good to all of us. Just dont racemix or get cucked and you are golden.
>>70859559
That's a man, baby.
>>70872328
Repressed how exactly? Looking at all the societies usually regarded as the greatest (Greeks, Romans, British Empire ect) they were all monogamous but none of them were very repressed sexually
>>70868931
Checkmate.
>>70854274
Why is this being posted everyday? The refutation is the same as it was yesterday and the same as it was last year.
Pic related.
>>70854274
>>70872876
They were all repressed while they were growing up and becoming great, then they hit their climax where they became the incredibly sexually open cultures we see them as today, and soon afterword collapsed. There are many reasons this could happen, but the point it is that it does happen.
>>70854274
>Stats that show happiness in marriage inversely related to number of previous sexual partners do not take into account the fact that most people who marry virgins are raised in a family oriented culture to begin with.
Found the hole in your argument.
> Even if this was true. So the fuck what?
It shows a lack of self-control, impulsivity and moral looseness.
>>70872786
>girls got fucked and the experience probably did good to all of us
Why would your wife getting fucked by men other than you be good for the two of you?
>>70854274
>How can this argument even be refuted using adult counter-arguments?
KEK
U
C
K
>>70873356
Because he's a Brit and the idea turns him on.
>>70857025
this.
sexual baggage is so disgusting and ruins all intimacy
>>70854274
Women who have had a lot of partners, are likely to be an unstable, evident by the fact that they can't get a relationship to work.
Women who sleep around, have a much higher rate of anxiety, depression and other psychological disorders.
Women who sleep around are more likely to be unfaithful, and tend to have poor impulse control.
Women who have sleep around, are more likely to have problems with substance abuse.
Women who sleep around a lot are more likely to be terrible parents.
Basically, women who sleep around tend to be really shitty people.
Firstly, I don't actually think there is THAT much of a double standard. If a guy bangs prostitutes, fucks teenage girls, and gets handjobs in alleys from gay men he is not seen as cool.
It's only if he manages to fuck lots of hot women. Which rarely happens. That's not usually what a female slut does though. She just gets used a cumrag in lots of shitty sexual experiences.
If I met a girl that had banged 40 super models I'd probably be quite impressed.
The reason why I don't want to sleep with her isn't a particularly logical ones. Although I think it does touch at something on an animal level. It's like -- why do I like my toilet at home but find public toilets gross?
It's not necessarily logical, but it's how I feel.
>>70873193
Yet again what is your definition of "repression?"
1. The degree of sexual openess in Ancient Greek society was pretty consistent from prehistoric times until the fall of Hellinistic Greece, they never had any significant period of decadence
2. Other than the notorious decadence of late stage Roman Empire their sexual openess was also pretty consistent from the days of the Republic onwards
3. Other than the decadence of regency Britian the sexual openess of the British Empire was also pretty consistent
Seriously OP. Why would you want to date a harlot?
http://pastebin.com/xMQ9wAwW
>>70873439
L M A O
When you marry, you want someone you can trust.
That person you must be willing to trust with everything. Your life, your home, your money, your future.
Just as you don't employ a ex con as a bank cashier, you don't marry a slut.
>>70873855
The Greeks were city states. While Athens might have been decadent, Sparta was not. The Spartans saved the Athenians a few times.
>>70854677
>What if she was with one bf but they banged 500 times
You guys never consider that, think that two different dicks once has a different effect as the same dick twice
what kind of mentally deranged whack job sticks their genitalia in a bowl of cheerios?
>>70855572
Fuck me that top right statistic is scary. One extra-marital partner and the chance of divorce increased by 30%
>>70873774
>If a guy bangs prostitutes, fucks teenage girls, and gets handjobs in alleys from gay men he is not seen as cool.
Lol, tell that to Russell Brand
>>70858997
>Talks about the 15 women he's been with
>"wow check out this 1 (one) woman who's really fucking nice"
>>70854274
Honestly, I don't give a single shit about how many people you fuck, just don't go around crying about "muh oppression" when men will refuse to date you afterwards. Nobody is obligated to date you. It's like black people crying about "racism" because whites don't find them attractive, it's ridiculous.
Hey if this stupid shitty picture (OP) was posted so many times, and it is annoying, and most (sane) people disagree with it, could someone please track and kill OP, or just maim/torture him/her (anal rape with a cactus sounds about right, and/or cutting off both of his/her index fingers).
>>70874014
Yet again neither Athens nor any of the other city states were particularly decadent, other than prostitutes female promiscuity was completely unheard of
>>70873356
Experience, romantically and sexually, makes people less prone to bullshit in general. She knows how I stack up sexually, romantically and as a life partner compared to other men. It gives context. Context is what makes women less vulnerable to the MUH DICK N SIXPACK type men.
>>70868698
Listen beaner, not everyone is as morally bankrupt as your people. Some of us think it's unethical to slit peoples' throats and smear them across the sidewalk over money and drugs.
>>70874406
This was put on the regular.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assemblywomen
>>70873855
This helps sum up what I'm poorly trying to say kind of well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxpVwBzFAkw
>>70854274
The woman does absorb DNA from the male we came to that conclusion last time, but it doesnt effect her eggs DNA or child's mitochondrialDNA just the maturation of the embryo in the womb
>>70873913
How does race have anything to do with it? Is that literally the only thing britcucks know how to fall back on nowadays?
>>70857025
>Sex could have been a grand adventure that we went through together, experiencing new things together.
Anecdotally, my high school sweetheart and I had this experience and it was really positive. I wish it had worked out with her in the end, but we had very divergent goals in life and I was too bluepill back then.
Now that I'm older it's hard to find a woman that wasn't pump and dumped at some point in her late teens/early twenties and has some sort of emotional baggage.
>>70874537
It's absurdist satire tho, in reality Greek women were expected to never leave their house except to attend church, thus meaning they had pretty much zero opportunity to cheat unless they had depraved lesbian sex at one of their sex-segregated festivals
>tfw you will never watch Ancient Greek lesbians having depraved sapphic sex in honour of Dionysus
>>70872972
>actually believing that is a coherent argument
in all species of primates including our own, males don't take care of the children, fatherhood is basically a social construct.
why should you have your children? what is the difference? if someone switched your child at birth right and you never found out, nothing would be different. You would have the same life as if that child was genetically yours. So logically from this it follows that it doesn't really matter if the child is yours or not. Refute that you fucking muh evolution, muh genes neckbeard.
>>70854274
Among those who care, men and women are held to the same standard of chastity. If you aren't Christian then possibly there's a double standard, but I also don't care about your opinion on the subject you degenerate filth.
>>70872486
>implying anyone on 4chan has a a penis long enough
>>70874672
Video is pretty accurate, I'm just saiyan with the exception of a few brief periods of degeneracy 99% of girls lost their virginity on their wedding night during their teens and then proceeded to fuck nobody except their husband from then on, despite this great societies were never exactly "repressed" nor has virginity ever been seen as "cool" except in Arthurian chivalry stories
>>70854274
Dude really ? This again ?
What's so hard to understand ?
>>70875025
Because men who have no stake in society will lead to its collapse.
>>70875542
I think you're pretty off the mark.
This same lame ass thead that gets posted every fucking day??
>>70875025
No you wouldnt, and no it isnt. Man's dole purpose inlife is to spread his seed, if he doesnt passon his genes he failed. This is why he evolved.
>>70854274
The only argument I need is its degeneracy to sleep with multiple partners, whether you're a man or a woman. You are only meant to have one sexual partner, and wait for marriage to have sex. This whole thing about be open about sex and women are sexual creatures that need to embrace it and ride the cock carousel judgement free is what started turning western countries into the pussified cuck nations they are.
>>70875025
>in all species of primates including our own, males don't take care of the children, fatherhood is basically a social construct.
That's false, male gorillas care for their children in a manner resembling human fatherhood, unlike other primates gorillas also have almost zero female promiscuity and as such gorillas have no penis barbs and smaller testicles than primates with high levels of female promiscuity such as chimpanzees. Humans likewise have smaller testicles and only vestigial traces of penis barbs, this would imply that:
A. Fatherhood is the result of a lack of female promiscuity
B. Humans were once as promiscuous as chimps(hence the vestigial penis barbs) but natural selection has caused us to become more and more monogamous through our history, hence the rise of fatherhood
>>70875627
but you have no stake in it either way.
some misguided belief that reproduction is the continuation of one self, that's just retarded.
you are nothing but two halfs of your parents genes, your child will be half your genes and half the genes of your mother. this is completely irrelevant.
what you are is not your genes in any way.
you could have had an identical twin with whom you have been separated since birth. you grew up in america while your twin grew up in idk eastern europe.
you would be two completely different people even though you have the SAME EXACT genes. So what does that lead you to believe? Reproduction is in no way a continuation of one self. You end with you. To think that your child is part you is stupid. To think your child should be a legacy of some sort is beyond pathetic if that's all you can manage to leave behind.
>stake in society will lead to its collapse.
So this is actually just a misguided belief of the patriarchal capitalist system that benefits from the society being divided into families. If you were under a different system, family wouldn't exist, and the whole idea of your children being an extension of yourself wouldn't exist either.
So in short, you're fucking retarded and you should kill yourself.
>>70875795
> Man's dole purpose inlife is to spread his seed
There is no purpose to anything you philosophical illiterate.
>if he doesnt passon his genes he failed
Do you have some manual for life where that is written or are you pulling that out of your ass? Who says he failed? You? lol
>This is why he evolved.
Life is a chemical process with no meaning or purpose behind it. There is no "why" you dumb fuck.
So aside from being philosophically retarded you are also scientifically challenged. Kill yourself.
>>70875664
I can think of at least a dozen empires that fell without having an age of decadence, I'm not saying decadence doesn't kill civilisations but it's far from being the only cause
>>70876327
>deres no purpussXD
Yes there is retard, humans are animals and operate on the same principles as every other animal. They evolved sexual pleasure to increase the likelihood of passing on their genes. Every action a man takes has this as its end goal, preservation of his genetic line. Just because you believe you are above the simple formula all life runs on doesnt mean you are. You are a computer acting ina way that is predictable to anyone who understands your programming.
Dumb cyka blat. Kill yourself Pyotr
>>70876269
>A. Fatherhood is the result of a lack of female promiscuity
ahahah no. female humans are the MOST promisuise out of all primate females. THE MOST.
That is the reason why our penises are the biggest both absolutely and relatively to our size, against all other primates.
The way penis is, the longer it is it is capable of going deeper in the vagina and scooping out the semen of the previous guy and then you insert your own but now the next guy after you would need to have an even longer penis to inseminate the female successfully. The shape of the head of the penis is made so it pulls the semen out of the vagina as you fuck the vagina.
The more females fuck, the greater competition will be and therefore the greater selection so you end up with a species of primates with the longest dicks of them all because their females are the biggest whores of them all.
>natural selection has caused us to become more and more monogamous through our history,
Nope, actually it's capitalism, or rather its first primitive iterations. It is them who made our economy, who shaped our families, who invented monogamy. That didn't exist before this primitive version of capitalism.
why do yall 4chan virgin ass neckbeards worry about men getting pussy? lmao kys
get out and get some pussy instead of discussing cereal you internet addicted sexually degenerated overweight niggers
stop pushing this nu male propaganda, no one wants a woman that has taken 50 cocks
>>70854274
>>70876782
>Yes there is retard
what is it then? who says that's exactly what it is and why is it that and not something else?
>humans are animals and operate on the same principles as every other animal. They evolved sexual pleasure to increase the likelihood of passing on their genes.
>hi mom I just got an A in 6th grade biology look at me ! I'm a big scientist man now!!1!
>Every action a man takes has this as its end goal,
hahaha no, this is the most retarded thing you said. If you go and kill yourself (please try at least) how in the loving fuck would that action has your reproduction as its end goal you fucking retard?!
>preservation of his genetic line
for what purpose exactly? are you going somewhere? why is preservation of it needed?
>Just because you believe you are above the simple formula all life runs on doesnt mean you are
You misunderstood. I'm above you.
> You are a computer acting ina way that is predictable to anyone who understands your programming.
my eye just started twitching
>Dumb cyka blat. Kill yourself Pyotr
and those are russian words and a russian name...
>Tfw new gf is a virgin (I am not). Never sucked a dick before, never gave anyone a handjob, etc.
Feels good man.
>>70868698
>bro, you don't know anything unless you were raped as a child
>>70876983
Kek, if we were the most promiscuous primate then why do we only have vestigial penis barbs? Every other species of primate with high levels of female promiscuity has fully developed penis barbs so why don't we? Why also do we have comparatively small testicles that release an ejaculation with only 10% of the sperm that is in a chimp's ejaculation, surely if we were indeed the most promiscuous species natural selection would have resulted in us having extremely large sperm counts, not one of the lowest sperm counts of any mammal on earth.
>>70877600
>he actually believes this
>>70863696
just die, kill yourself, kike freak
>>70877641
all of what you are listing are the consequences of society, agriculture and so on, not of nature
I didn't pull that one out of my ass you stupid cunt, go look it up, this is currently though of as being true, our females are the most promiscuous out of all other female primates.
>>70876983
>That didn't exist before this primitive version of capitalism.
Except for the fact that monogamy and polygyny are both observed in hunter gatherer societies with no concept of capitalism
>>70854274
>argument
>implying
But ill play along
Firstly, he goes from talking about 'people' to suddenly talking about women, yet deftly applying the condition from the first statement to both men and women in that they should both be held to the same standard even though hes only talking explicitly about women. This is a favorite tactic of liberals I noticed. They like to apply the same rules to everybody, when they know well enough this will not work, then complain when it doesnt work and blame it on somebody else when things go wrong. They then think that something should be done about their newly acquired falsely applied standards to compensate them for their inability to help themselves to be able to achieve these standards. Its a clever way of milking resources out of people gullible enough to believe this shit. Sad part is, it works.
Holding men and women to the same standards will not work and it never will, because they are different. And before anybody starts thinking about a loose male, im not implying that this is a good thing. If we are talking about holding both sexes to the same standard, the cards are clearly in favor of the women (no draft, laws clearly in favor of women, etc.), yet this seems to go ignored and the attention is redirected to some gross atrocity men seemingly collectively commit i.e. Casanova (who I never see btw, where are these shitbags anyways). When in fact its only a few shitbags out of a hundred thousand, yet all men are held unfairly held to this standard, talk about standards all day.
The fact that it bothers him is subjective, it doesnt need to be stated.
>>70877600
>he thinks she isn't lying
>>70878121
>monogamy and polygyny are both observed in hunter gatherer societies
>monogamy [...] observed in hunter gatherer societies
ahahhahhah
>>70854274
A vagina is like a can of coke no one wants it after a dicks been in it
>>70854274
There's nothing wrong with someone who's tried 100 types of cereal. There's something wrong with someone who's tried 100 different men.
>>70878371
and what's wrong with that?
>>70878066
How exactly is agriculture responsible for us losing our penis barbs? Why do human genitals significantly closer resemble those of non-promiscuous gorillas than promiscuous chimps, gorillas don't have agriculture. Why also has natural selection resulted in women having hymens? Why do women have a thin membrane that's almost always broken when the vagina is penetrated if not because natural selection favoured women who had a semi-reliable indicator of their virginity?
>>70878201
>pt. 3
Comparing cereal to number of sexual partners is completely irrelevant, and is not an argument. On the topic of number of sexual partners, its no different than not wanting to date somebody because they have a extensive criminal record. They are likely going to commit a crime again, hence the avoidance. So why not apply this same logic to number of sexual partners seeing as both instinct and many decades of statistics support this same avoidance conclusion in that it will very likely result in misery? Its a mere interest in one's own future, people want what is best for them.
>my past doesnt matter, please let me do things still
Wanting people to ignore your past is scumbag behavior and irresponsible on the part of the person wanting the ignoring to be done. It is also doing a disservice to the people who have adhered to their commitment to not do such things. People who enable this behavior are not to be ignored either. This way of doing things is not sustainable.
>>70854274
Would you eat from a bowl of Cheerios that others have eaten from?
>>70854410
fpbp
>>70854274
Stop posting this every fucking day. This has been argued to death.
>>70878289
Literally all those tribes of uncontacted people in South America and Papua New Guinea practice either monogamy or polygyny, if you can find any example of hunter gatherers practicing female promiscuity feel free to cite them
It's just biological : men must spread their seed as much as they can, women must chose the best seed. That's why evolutionary speaking, a successful man is one who had lots of women, a successful woman is one that got the best man. It's all due to how reproduction works, and we're wired to think that way.
>>70858183
It's a frog.
>>70879100
heh, only during cavemen days and modern days.
monogamy and eternal bonding was always encouraged.
>>70854274
Can the mods just autoban for this thread already? I'd rather see "Black cock big, how can white men even compete?" threads then this one.
>>70868847
those tacos were worth it
>>70879277
Monogamy is a social construct, it's better for society. But we have leftovers from our natural state which explain why a man with lots of partner is seen as alpha, and why a female offering her to the alpha is natural.
>>70854274
>well then, screw you cheerios. I cant go into the past and uneat all those cereals, but that doesnt mean I dont genuinely enjoy your whole grain crunch
Actually, your 48th cheerio will taste much less special than the first time. You just wish you could chew on the first one forever, a never-ending experience.
Either way thats fucking retarded, they are cheerios, not people.
>>70879659
by that i mean, it doesnt take into account anything at all. the metaphysics of love and sex.
>>70879641
of course. but i think only during degenerate times would anyone think a big retard is an actually bigger alpha male than someone who provides for his family on all levels it didnt use to be like this
sorry im raiding in final fantasy 14
>What is a condom?
What is HPV? Herpes?
>>70854274
You really don't need a counter argument. You're allowed to find sluts repulsive without explaining to her why she's not marriage material.
Grow a back bone. It's 1997
>>70854274
>the loose vagina meme
I can't believe people still believe this when they have access to the Internet.
>>70856517
>symbiotic bargain
>sex only as a means to reproduce
>men provide their security and their trust
>to raise kids
>paternity tests?
Please tell me this is a pasta?
>>70857025
Thank you anon. Sexual behavior in humans is far more about social interaction than just producing offspring.
There's nothing degenerate or embarrassing about trying to find one's place amongst others.
>>70870958
This is literally the worst platform I've ever heard. It's even worse than Bernie's.
>>70854274
It's fucking simple to understand why men don't want sluts. It's basic supply and demand. When a woman is easy to fuck, she loses economic value as a sexual partner.
Women slutting around are literally devaluing themselves as sexual partners.
Regardless of which side is the cause, there's still a correlation. Done.
>>70858062
Cheerios don't talk either
>>70868698
>Shut up virgin, my opinion's better 'cause I was molested by my fat auntie.
>>70854274
I don't need to counter-argument
If you have $5 in your bucket you'll have to settle for a poo in loo meal from some shitty curry house where the chef doesn't wash his hands. If you have $50 you eat something better.
In the same way, if you aren't really lucky and don't do well in life but are desperate to settle down, you'll have to fall for an used up slut that couldn't find something better. But if you're successful enough, you'll be able to marry a virgin that is still in her teens and provide anything she may need and desire.
If I'm paying, I am free to pick whatever I want.
>>70854681
earlier they were all pushing socialism now they're pushing faggotry and gender politics.
You're still at it,huh? Does it tire you,posting this shit every single day? John Green,is that you? Did the tumblrinas forget about you,so you try to shitpost on /pol/ to feel like you're special again? Whoever you are,OP,know this. You're a massive faggot and I hope you mother strangles you with your own intestines one day.
>>70872876
>believing the greece was just a giant orgy meme
>>70870958
As an economics students this offends me, what a fucktard
Whores are incapable of pair bonding.
>>70868698
>they breed like rats
>rats flee their sinking ship
Poetry
>>70854274
Because if you've tried 30 brands of cereal before Cheerios, it's more likely that you have trouble committing to one brand than it is that ALL the other brands simply weren't your type.
That being the case, it is highly likely that after some time, you're going to move on to some other cereal after you grow tired of Cheerios.
So why should Cheerios waste its time with you?
